'Caste census' begins in Karnataka, technical glitches reported in some parts
Bengaluru (PTI): The Social and Educational Survey, popularly known as the 'caste census' in Karnataka, commenced on Monday, with enumerators going door-to-door to collect data.
While the survey is underway in most parts of the state, officials indicated a potential delay of one or two days in the Greater Bengaluru area, where five corporations have been newly formed, due to training and necessary preparations.
The survey by the Karnataka State Commission for Backward Classes will see as many as 1.75 lakh enumerators, mostly government school teachers, covering around 7 crore people in approximately 2 crore households across the state.
"The survey is underway, we have received reports from various places," official sources said.
However, there were reports of technical glitches and server issues at several places, including Shivamogga, Haveri, Ballari, Chitradurga, Kodagu districts, delaying the survey in some places.
At many of these places, surveys continued after problems were solved, sources said.
According to officials, the survey, estimated to cost Rs 420 crore, will be conducted “scientifically,” using a 60-question questionnaire prepared for the exercise.
The commission is expected to submit its report to the government by December.
Amid criticism and objections from various sections, including within the ruling Congress, regarding the prepared caste list containing dual identity castes like 'Kuruba Christian', 'Brahmin Christian', the commission said the names of these castes will be "masked", but not removed.
Backward Classes Commission's Chairman Madhusudan R Naik on Sunday clarified that the list of castes in the survey handbook is solely for internal use and doesn’t have any legal sanctity. It was only to help the enumerators find castes as per the alphabetical order.
He said the app used for the survey will not display the 33 castes with dual identities, as they have been masked. However, citizens are free to declare them voluntarily.
Officials said each household will be geo-tagged using its electricity meter number and will be assigned a Unique Household ID (UHID).
During the data collection process, ration cards and Aadhaar details will be linked to mobile numbers.
For those unavailable at home during the survey and to address grievances, if any, a dedicated helpline number (8050770004) has been set up. Citizens can also participate online, they added.
The Karnataka High Court on Monday said it will hear on September 23 arguments on whether the ongoing survey, being carried out, should be stayed.
A batch of petitions challenging the legality of the survey is before the HC bench.
The survey is taking place amid efforts by various castes and community groups to consolidate their respective population, aimed at ensuring their numerical strength.
Aimed at consolidating their castes strength, seers and leaders of Vokkaligas, a dominant community, have asked their people to identify their religion as ‘Hindu’ and caste as just ‘Vokkaliga’, while “sub-caste should be mentioned only if it is absolutely necessary.
A delegation of Vokkaliga Congress leaders met AICC President Mallikarjun Kharge, seeking the postponement of the survey. They expressed concerns over the lack of preparation and training. They wondered how the survey would be completed in 15 days and sought three months instead.
There seems to be some lack of clarity among another dominant community, the Veerahaiva-Lingayats, as leaders have suggested the community members exercise their discretion while mentioning their religion, while urging them to mention Veerashaiva-Lingayat in the caste column. There were voices within the community to mention Veerashaiva-Lingayat as a religion, instead of Hindus.
Several other communities like Kurubas, Muslims, Scheduled Castes, Brahmins, among others too have held brainstorming sessions to decide how to identify themselves during the survey in order to consolidate their numbers.
The BJP, which has accused the Congress government of conducting the survey "hastily" to "divide Hindus", has also questioned the need for the exercise, when the Centre has already announced caste enumeration in the national census.
BJP state BJP President B Y Vijayendra charged the Congress government with trying to divide the Hindu society, and called it "unfortunate".
He termed the caste census as the "misadventure" of the state government, despite not having any powers to conduct such a survey.
The government had spent Rs 165.51 crore on an earlier Social and Educational Survey in 2015, which was later discarded.
The Karnataka Cabinet on June 12 approved a fresh survey, effectively nullifying the 2015 exercise, citing Section 11(1) of the Karnataka State Commission for Backward Classes Act, 1995, which mandates a revision of the state backward classes list once every 10 years.
Several communities, notably Karnataka’s two dominant groups—Vokkaligas and Veershaiva-Lingayats—have expressed strong reservations about the 2015 survey, calling it “unscientific” and demanding a fresh enumeration. There were also opposing voices from within the ruling Congress party.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Single higher education regulator bill tabled in LS; Oppn flags ‘centralisation,' JPC likely
New Delhi: A bill to set up a 13-member body to regulate institutions of higher education was introduced in the Lok Sabha on Monday.
Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan introduced the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, which seeks to establish an overarching higher education commission along with three councils for regulation, accreditation, and ensuring academic standards for universities and higher education institutions in India.
Meanwhile, the move drew strong opposition, with members warning that it could weaken institutional autonomy and result in excessive centralisation of higher education in India.
The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025, earlier known as the Higher Education Council of India (HECI) Bill, has been introduced in line with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.
The proposed legislation seeks to merge three existing regulatory bodies, the University Grants Commission (UGC), the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), into a single unified body called the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan.
At present, the UGC regulates non-technical higher education institutions, the AICTE oversees technical education, and the NCTE governs teacher education in India.
Under the proposed framework, the new commission will function through three separate councils responsible for regulation, accreditation, and the maintenance of academic standards across universities and higher education institutions in the country.
According to the Bill, the present challenges faced by higher educational institutions due to the multiplicity of regulators having non-harmonised regulatory approval protocols will be done away with.
The higher education commission, which will be headed by a chairperson appointed by the President of India, will cover all central universities and colleges under it, institutes of national importance functioning under the administrative purview of the Ministry of Education, including IITs, NITs, IISc, IISERs, IIMs, and IIITs.
At present, IITs and IIMs are not regulated by the University Grants Commission (UGC).
Government to refer bill to JPC; Oppn slams it
The government has expressed its willingness to refer it to a joint committee after several members of the Lok Sabha expressed strong opposition to the Bill, stating that they were not given time to study its provisions.
Responding to the opposition, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said the government intends to refer the Bill to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for detailed examination.
Congress Lok Sabha MP Manish Tewari warned that the Bill could result in “excessive centralisation” of higher education. He argued that the proposed law violates the constitutional division of legislative powers between the Union and the states.
According to him, the Bill goes beyond setting academic standards and intrudes into areas such as administration, affiliation, and the establishment and closure of university campuses. These matters, he said, fall under Entry 25 of the Concurrent List and Entry 32 of the State List, which cover the incorporation and regulation of state universities.
Tewari further stated that the Bill suffers from “excessive delegation of legislative power” to the proposed commission. He pointed out that crucial aspects such as accreditation frameworks, degree-granting powers, penalties, institutional autonomy, and even the supersession of institutions are left to be decided through rules, regulations, and executive directions. He argued that this amounts to a violation of established constitutional principles governing delegated legislation.
Under the Bill, the regulatory council will have the power to impose heavy penalties on higher education institutions for violating provisions of the Act or related rules. Penalties range from ₹10 lakh to ₹75 lakh for repeated violations, while establishing an institution without approval from the commission or the state government could attract a fine of up to ₹2 crore.
Concerns were also raised by members from southern states over the Hindi nomenclature of the Bill. N.K. Premachandran, an MP from the Revolutionary Socialist Party representing Kollam in Kerala, said even the name of the Bill was difficult to pronounce.
He pointed out that under Article 348 of the Constitution, the text of any Bill introduced in Parliament must be in English unless Parliament decides otherwise.
DMK MP T.M. Selvaganapathy also criticised the government for naming laws and schemes only in Hindi. He said the Constitution clearly mandates that the nomenclature of a Bill should be in English so that citizens across the country can understand its intent.
Congress MP S. Jothimani from Tamil Nadu’s Karur constituency described the Bill as another attempt to impose Hindi and termed it “an attack on federalism.”
_vb_22.jpeg)
